Chukei
Chaim: More Discussions about 600,000 People
600,000
on the Street or in the City?
17. Within the meikel opinion, that
there must be 600,000 people for an area to be called a reshus horabim (above,
8), the poskim argue whether there must be 600,000 people traveling on a street
to give it the status of a reshus horabim or whether the main streets that
serve the public are considered reshus horabim even if the 600,000 people are
spread throughout the city.
Rebuttal:
The simple
reading of the Shulchan Aruch is that the criterion of shishim ribo
is conditional on the street. It is
illogical to argue that the population of a city reflects the number of people
who can make use of any street. Many people who live in one section of a city
do not utilize the main streets in other sections of their city, so why should
they be included in the tally of all the users of the city's main streets? As
the Maharsham argued (3:188), if the criterion of shishim ribo
includes even those who occasionally use the street, how do we apply limits on
the amount of time needed to fulfill the criterion? To
label a street as a reshus harabbim, the criterion of shishim ribo requires
that there be 600,000 people traversing the street at least on some/many days
of the year. Hence, there is almost no street, even in large cities, that would
be classified as a reshus harabbim.
Chukei Chaim: 18. The Mechaber’s wording implies
that a domain is only a reshus horabim if 600,000 people pass through that
domain (שו''ע סי' שמ''ה ס''ז). Some use this in combination with
another kula, e.g., when the gates of a city do not go all the way through the
city, from gate to gate (שו''ת דברי מלכיאל ח''ד ס''ג).
Rebuttal:
No, the criterion
of mefulash u’mechuvanim mshaar l’shaar is not a kula. It is a
fundament in reshus harabbim. Even Rav Aharon Kotler, who only applied
the criterion in certain circumstances, admitted that it was the fundament that
was relied on (Mishnas Rav Aharon, 6:2). The Divrei Malkiel does
not make any such combination. The criterion of mefulash and shishim
ribo are two distinct fundaments of a reshus harabbim, and they do
not need to be combined to be utilized.
Chukei
Chaim:
19. However, it is clear from many poskim that as long as a city has 600,000
people in it, the main roads are considered reshus horabim (רש''י עירובין דף נ''ט הובא בשער הציון סי' שמ''ה סקכ''כ, ריטב''א הובא בביאה''ל שם ד''ה שאין, שו''ת אחיעזר ח''ד סי' ח', חכמת שלמה סוף סי' שס''ג, תפארת ישראל הקדמה לשבת, שו''ת אגרות משה ח''א סי' קל''ט ענף ה).
Rebuttal: This is simply incorrect, and a
misreading of the sources. None of the sources listed maintain that the
criterion of shishim ribo is conditional on a
city containing shishim ribo, whose main streets would then be labeled a
reshus harabbim. Rashi maintains that when a city which contains
shishim ribo has one main road that would need to be used to enter and exit
the city, the road could be labeled as a reshus harabbim (Rashi, Eruvin
59b). However, if the street never has shishim ribo traversing it, it is
definitely not classified as a reshus harabbim. The Shaar HaTziyun
cited (actually it should be סקכ''ה)
is clearly referring to shishim ribo traversing a mavoi hamefulash.
Accordingly, the Shaar HaTziyun requires that shishim ribo
actually traverse the street. The Ritva argues that all people who
traverse a road, even those who are not part of the city’s population, should
be included in the tally in order to determine if there is shishim ribo
traversing therein. The Ritva’s shita is not predicated on the
population of the city, only on the volume of pedestrians traversing the road
itself. The Achiezer maintains that once one road has
shishim ribo traversing therein, the roads of the city that open into it
are classified as a reshus harabbim. The Chochmas Shlomo is
referring to mechitzos biydai shomayim, which in order to be negated do
not need shishim ribo traversing the mechitzos themselves,
rather it would be sufficient if there is a reshus harrabim contained
therein. The shishim ribo
would of course
need to be congregated on the street. No part of the city would be classified
as a reshus harabbim, even if the city has a population of shishim
ribo, unless there is a street that has shishim ribo traversing it
(see his Sefer HaChaim, siman 345:7, and Eitz HaChaim, siman
273). Rav Moshe maintains that the criterion of shishim ribo is
conditional on an area of 12 mil by 12 mil, which contains a
population of three million people. There is no one on this list who upholds
that the main roads of a city which contains shishim ribo are classified
as a reshus harabbim.
Chukei Chaim: 20. Residential streets. It is likely that only the main roads used for
transportation by the 600,000 people are included in the areas factored into
the count of 600,000. However, residential streets that primarily serve that
neighborhood’s residents but not the majority of the city’s populace are not
considered reshus horabim d’oraisa even according to the machmir opinion (הגר''נ קרליץ).
[Nowadays that everyone uses navigation devices, e.g. Waze, which often direct
cars into neighborhoods when the main routes are congested – something that did
not used to be the case – it must be considered whether even residential
streets, at least those that reach the reshus horabim at both ends, are treated
as the reshus horabim since they also serve the general public.]
Rebuttal:
Rav Nissim Karelitz
is the only posek who maintains that the main roads of a city containing a
population of shishim ribo are classified as a reshus harabbim.
The fact that Rav Bleier would suggest that because of Waze we should possibly
classify residential streets as a reshus harabbim demonstrates the
absurdity we have reached when it comes to the issue of eruvin. The fact
is Rav Karelitz’s shita is a chiddush and is in opposition to the
minhag to erect eruvin even in cities containing a population of shishim
ribo (Warsaw, Lodz). To extrapolate further, by creating more scenarios to
be stringent, is absurd.
Chukei Chaim: 21. People in houses do not count. Even if
we say it is 600,000 people in the city and not necessarily on any given
street, there must be 600,000 people on the streets; people in houses are not
counted. They estimate that a city with a population of close to 3 million
likely has 600,000 people on the streets at a time, in which case it becomes a
reshus horabim (אג''מ או''ח ח''ה סי' כ''ח אות ה).
Rebuttal:
Rav Moshe argued
that the minhag was to establish eruvin in cities whose population was
greater than shishim ribo. This is in direct opposition to Rav
Karelitz’s shita, which included in the tally even those who were in
their homes. To include those people who were in their
homes, a reshus hayachid, in the tally, is beyond comprehension.
Chukei
Chaim: 600,000 Including People from Outside
22. The poskim discuss what the
halacha is when a city itself does not have 600,000 residents, but people come
from outside the city. Do those people count as part of the 600,000?
23. Some say visitors count as part
of the 600,000 (ריטב''א עירובין דף נ''ט הובא בביאה''ל סי' שמ''ה ד''ה שאין).
Rebuttal:
However, the Ritva
only reckons the street itself as a reshus harabbim, but not the entire
city.
Chukei Chaim: 24. Others say that even if we count
visitors, it is likely that only streets used by visitors are considered
reshuyos horabim d’oraisa, not streets they don’t use (ספק בס' בינת שמחה תיקון עירובין סי' ו', חכמת הלב עמק החכמה סי' ו' אות ג' בשם פוסקי זמנינו).
Rebuttal:
Nothing cited
from these seforim is to be believed, as they were written by members of
the Chevrah Hilchos Issurei Eruvin. There is no doubt that only the
roads that are traversed by shishim ribo are classified as a reshus
harabbim, and even those who do not reside in the city are included in the
tally [besides some poskim who maintain that once the main street of a city
contains shishim ribo traversing therein, the streets opening into it
can also be classified as a reshus harabbim, even if they do not contain
shishim ribo].
Chukei
Chaim: Counting People in Vehicles
25. The poskim discuss whether people
in vehicles count as part of the 600,000 or only pedestrians. Some want to be
meikel and say people in vehicles do not count since there were only
pedestrians in the encampment in the Midbar, and also because cars are enclosed
by walls ten tefachim high and have an area of four by four tefachim, so a car
is treated as a reshus hayachid (שו''ת משנה הלכות ח''ח סי' קמ''ד).
Rebuttal: In
fact, most poskim maintain that the occupants of a vehicle are not tallied in
the shishim ribo (Bais Ephraim, O.C. 26; Maharsham,
1:162; Yeshuos Malko, siman 26-27; Harei B’samim, 5:73; Bais
Av, 2:9:3; Mahari Stief, siman 68; Satmar Rav, Kuntres
Meoz U’Mekedem, p. 27; Divrei Yatziv, 2:172:13; V’yaan Yoseph,
1:155:1; Kuntres Tikkun Eruvin Manhattan, siman 12 p. 105; Kinyan
Torah, 4:40:6, and Rabbi Eliezer Y. Waldenberg zt”l, author of the Tzitz
Eliezer, as cited in The Contemporary Eruv, 2002 p. 54 note 119).
The reason is either because a vehicle itself is considered a reshus
hayachid and therefore its occupants are not incorporated in the count or
because we only include pedestrians (holchei regel) who traverse the
street in the tally.
It is important
to note that the concept that only holchei regel create a reshus
harabbim is already mentioned in the Rishonim (Or Zarua, Hilchos
Erev Shabbos siman 4, and Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam in Birchas
Avraham, siman 15).
Chukei Chaim: 26. However, most poskim argue with
this logic. They hold that people in cars also count as part of the 600,000 (פמ''ג סי' שס''ג א''א סק''ל, ערוך השלחן סי' שמ''ה סקכ''ו, אג''מ או''ח ח''א סי' קל''ט, ח''ה סי' כ''ח, הגר''א קוטלר, בעל ויואל משה הובא בס' יציאות השבת סי' ו', שו''ת שבט הלוי ח''ה סי' נ''ג).
Rebuttal:
The source
indicated for Rav Aharon Kotler and the Satmar Rebbe (Vayoel Moshe), is
a member of the Chevrah Hilchos Issurei Eruvin and nothing cited from
these seforim is to be believed. Case in point, this source claimed in
1981 that Rav Aharon maintained that the occupants of vehicles are included in
the tally of shishim ribo. However, in 1985, when Rav Aharon’s sefer
was first published, it disclosed that he did not accept the fundament of shishim
ribo altogether. Hence, as Rav Aharon did not uphold the criterion of shishim
ribo, it is unlikely that he would have expressed an opinion regarding how
to apply the criterion. It is more likely that since this member did not know
Rav Aharon’s opinion, he simply concocted that Rav Aharon maintained that we
include the occupants of vehicles in the tally of shishim ribo.
Furthermore, regarding the Vayoel Moshe, we know from other sources that
the Satmar Rebbe maintained that we do not include the occupants of vehicles in
the tally (Kuntres Meoz U’Mekedem, p. 27). The Pri Megadim is
referring to mechitzos biydai shomayim, in which case he maintains that holchei
regel are not required to negate the mechitzos. However, regarding a
tzuras hapesach, he would require people actually traversing the tzuras
hapesach to negate them. The Aruch HaShulchan, in 363:48, clearly
maintains that we do not include the occupants of vehicles in the tally of shishim
ribo (hence, what the Aruch HaShulchan writes in 345:26 needs to be
expounded on). Therefore, we are only left with Rav Moshe, and the Shevet
HaLevi who uphold that we do include the occupants of vehicles in the tally
of shishim ribo. However, as can
be discerned from the list mentioned above, they are in the minority.
